SC rules govt employees resigning before 25 years ineligible for pension

Highlights

• SC denies pension for resigning before 25 years' service
• Appellate Division upholds Bangladesh Service Rules provisions
• Court stresses discipline, accountability and institutional loyalty
• Government's appeal overturns High Court ruling

The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court has ruled that government employees who voluntarily resign before completing 25 years of qualifying service are not entitled to pension or other retirement benefits, upholding the relevant provisions of the Bangladesh Service Rules (BSR).

A three-member Appellate Division bench headed by Justice Md Rezaul Haque delivered the judgment on 11 March. The court's 28-page full verdict, authored by Justice Farah Mahbub, was published on the Supreme Court's website on Thursday (10 July) and came to wider public attention today (12 July).

The verdict came after the Appellate Division allowed the government's appeal against a High Court judgment that had declared part of the Bangladesh Service Rules denying pension benefits to employees who resign voluntarily unconstitutional.

Additional Attorney General Mohammad Arshadur Rouf and Anik R Haque, along with Deputy Attorney General Abdullah Al Mahmud, represented the state during the hearing. The writ petitioner, Md Mahbub Morshed, argued his own case.

The apex court held that the 25-year qualifying service requirement is a reasonable policy aimed at ensuring discipline, institutional loyalty, accountability and long-term commitment in public service.

In its observations, the Appellate Division said government service is not intended as temporary or short-term employment but as a structured professional career requiring continuity, accountability and unwavering institutional loyalty.

"Government service is not intended as temporary or short-term employment. Rather, it is a structured professional career where continuity, accountability and unwavering institutional loyalty are essential," the judgment said.

The court observed that allowing employees to receive pension benefits after voluntarily resigning before completing the prescribed service period could encourage some officials to use government employment merely as a stepping stone to gain experience, training, status or financial security before pursuing personal interests elsewhere.

Such a practice, it said, could lead to premature resignations, disrupt workforce planning, make it more difficult to retain experienced officials and weaken the discipline and sense of responsibility expected of career civil servants.

The court concluded that the 25-year qualifying service requirement represents a reasonable policy choice designed to preserve administrative discipline, good governance, institutional stability and long-term commitment within the civil service.

The case originated from former Additional District Judge Md Mahbub Morshed, now a Supreme Court lawyer, who voluntarily resigned in 2011 after serving for 19 years. His resignation took effect on 31 January, 2011 following consultation with the Supreme Court.

Morshed later applied to the Ministry of Law for pension and gratuity benefits. In 2015, the ministry referred the matter to the Office of the Chief Accounts Officer, which rejected his pension claim.

The office cited Rule 300(a) of the Bangladesh Service Rules (First Volume), which states that resignation from government service results in forfeiture of previous service, making it ineligible for pension calculation. As Morshed had not completed 25 years of qualifying service, he was not entitled to pension under the Public Servants (Retirement) Act, 1974.

Challenging both the decision and the validity of Rule 300(a), Morshed filed a writ petition in 2016.

On 18 March, 2021, the High Court declared Rule 300(a) inconsistent with the Constitution and struck down the 25 March, 2015 letter rejecting his pension claim. It also directed the authorities to calculate and pay his pension and other retirement benefits within 90 days.

Rule 300(a) provides that resignation, dismissal or removal from government service on grounds including misconduct, bankruptcy, inefficiency or failure to pass required examinations results in forfeiture of previous service. 

However, Rule 300(b) exempts employees who resign to join another pensionable government post.

The government challenged the High Court ruling before the Appellate Division, which overturned the verdict on 11 March this year.

Following publication of the full judgment, Morshed told reporters today that he had not yet received the complete copy of the verdict and would decide whether to file a review petition after examining it.